Jurassic World

[The Wormhole]

I thought the movie was all kinds of awesome. It had a great nostalgia factor but didn't feel like it was retreading what was done before. It had a lot of cool moments showing how an actual theme park with dinosaurs might actually work, and some really cool dinosaur moments.

Chris Pratt's character was cool, and I liked the thing he had going on with the raptors. Honestly, I think I could go in for a movie about him and the raptors off on an adventure through a forest for whatever reason. I also like how Pratt really seems to work as a badass action hero. Especially considering his origins as a primarily comedic actor.

The climatic fight with the T-Rex is such an awesome moment that got me more excited than I have been at the movies in a while.

This might actually be one of my favourites for this year.

 

[Mr Light]

I had high expectations for this movie. They were completely exceeded.

Every second of this movie was pure nostalgic gold for me. I absolutely loved it. I have a particular love for theme parks and Disney World, so setting the movie in a working park packed with people made this absolutely perfect. I have no complaints about this movie. I didn't even mind the two kids; they were less annoying than Lex and Tim.

Hell, I even CRIED a few times!

Spoiler: movie

When they first showed the petting zoo and showed little kids riding baby triceratops. When the Raptor RAN UP THE BACK OF THE T-REX TO FIGHT THE INDOMINUS. THEY WERE WORKING TOGETHER! THEY PUSHED HIM OVER TO THE MOSASAUR! And then they looked at each other and let each one go! And when the raptor looked at Grady and decided to let him alone. THEY HAD A MOMENT!

Oh, and I LOVED the fact that they spend the entire movie setting up the raptors as allies... they set them loose on the Indominus... and they immediately turn on the humans!!!

I loved that the Indominus was a "boss" monster that no-one could defeat. The ending of the movie was such an amazing moment of teamwork. This completely sets the same concept in JP3 to shame; there they also tried to introduce a "badder than a T-Rex!" beastie and it was just boring.

 

[CaptainWacky]

I refuse to read this thread until it's moved to the correct forum.

 

[BillJ]

I refuse to read this thread until it's moved to the correct forum.

Science and Technology?

 

[nx1701g]

Yeah the new story seems insanely silly. After the first three movies I don't see anyone building a new park, that's just silly to me. And now the world is bored with dinosaurs so scientists are now creating new dinosaur species. Just seems silly.

I read that the new film disregards the events of TLW and JP3. It doesn't really have a feel for those events either in a sense and there's no references to them.

It kinda makes sense though, at least to me, that people would get tired of the Dinosaurs after a while. Look at the zoo. They're busy, but not like they are when a new attraction opens. If they came up with a dino that no one had ever seen before - claim it was a new discovery and never mention it was created - it'd get attention for them.

 

[Mr Light]

Just look at Universal Studios, they're opening a new ride once a year!

 

[Kronos]

One should never find themselves rooting for the dinosaurs.

Uh, whut??? That is exactly what you are suposed to do!

To eat all of the humans? that's what I was doing, eat those annoying kids!

 

[bigdaddy]

Is projected to make between 180-200 million dollars this weekend. I have a feeling it will be sooner than 12 years before the next sequel.

 

[Snaploud]

Chris Pratt and the special effects were great. Everything else was spectacularly bad (plotlines, acting, directing, portrayal of women, etc.). You'll enjoy it if you're expecting Sharknado with a higher budget.

 

[BillJ]

Chris Pratt and the special effects were great. Everything else was spectacularly bad (plotlines, acting, directing, portrayal of women, etc.). You'll enjoy it if you're expecting Sharknado with a higher budget.

I've seen two Sharknado movies, for me, Jurassic World was much, much better than either of them in every conceivable way.

 

[Mr Light]

Why is Jurassic World a poor portrayal of women? Because Claire was obsessed with her job and neglecting her family?

 

[Romulan_spy]

Why is Jurassic World a poor portrayal of women? Because Claire was obsessed with her job and neglecting her family?

No, I think it has more to do with how Claire goes from the professional business woman to running around in a tank top and falling for the male lead. They feel like she was reduced to just being eye candy when she was the main female lead in the movie. And of course the other female characters in the movie do nothing. The mom just cries a lot in her scenes, the assistant just stares at her phone instead of watching the kids and gets eaten by a dino, and the girl in the control room just relays orders in her bluetooth earpiece.

I don't share that view. For one, the business suit is not going to work if you are running around a hot jungle, being pursued by hungry dinos so it makes sense that Claire would need to change outfits. And the movie never gives us any gratuitous strip or undie scene (looking at you star trek into darkness) so I feel like the movie did not exploit the change of outfits. Also, Claire is an administrator and a business woman whereas Pratt's character is ex-navy and a dino trainer so it makes sense that he would take the lead when things got really tense. Lastly, there is nothing wrong with a woman wanting to start a family so I see nothing wrong with her eventually falling for Pratt, especially since the movie establishes early on that they went on a date so it is not unrealistic that they might try to date again.

 

[The Wormhole]

I read that the new film disregards the events of TLW and JP3. It doesn't really have a feel for those events either in a sense and there's no references to them.

I'm not sure that's entirely accurate. While it's true, it does feel more like a sequel to the first one and it doesn't acknowledge the other two at all, I see nothing in the movie which indicates the other two never happened at all. It's not like Superman Returns or the upcoming Alien film which do directly contradict movies in those respective series.

 

[Mr Light]

I did think Claire and Grady kissing was a little out of nowhere despite them being on one date in the past. They could have at least hung a lantern on it and say that's just because you saved my life.

 

[SG-17]

Holy crap, JW earned over $500m in its opening weekend. Beat Age of Ultron domestically and is the highest grossing opening weekend film ever.

 

[Romulan_spy]

Holy crap, JW earned over $500m in its opening weekend. Beat Age of Ultron domestically and is the highest grossing opening weekend film ever.

The critics can say whatever they want about the characters being shallow or the plot being weak, but obviously people are not tired of seeing dinosaurs on the big screen!

 

[Lance]

I am disappointed that they haven't taken on board the newest theories about what dinosaurs were really like. Science has moved on since the 1990s, yet the film-makers figured they'd rather stay consistent with what the old movies did than accept that dinosaurs were more like giant chickens than lizard creatures.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...rld-dinosaurs-slammed-by-paleontologists.html

I do have to give them credit for at least acknowledging that the dinosaurs in the JP fiction aren't like real ones, though. (Wu states in JW that because the JP dinosaurs are genetic hybrids cloned from frog DNA, this is why they don't match up with what the 'real' dinosaurs probably looked like.)

 

[Goji]

I read that the new film disregards the events of TLW and JP3. It doesn't really have a feel for those events either in a sense and there's no references to them.

I'm not sure that's entirely accurate. While it's true, it does feel more like a sequel to the first one and it doesn't acknowledge the other two at all, I see nothing in the movie which indicates the other two never happened at all. It's not like Superman Returns or the upcoming Alien film which do directly contradict movies in those respective series.

There was mention, I believe, that the new park had been open for 20 years, which would put it opening in 1995. If The Lost World happened in 1997 and Jurassic Park III in 2001, that's a bit of a problem, since nobody in either of those two movies acted like there was an apparently successful dinosaur venture happening at the time.

I'm one of the few who enjoys both previous sequels, though this series isn't one that needs a strict timeline in my view. A lot of this movie did remind me a lot of The Lost World and Jurassic Park III, in any case. Jurassic Park III is the first time raptors are shown to communicate verbally, as they do in this movie. It's also the first time they are shown to consciously decide against attacking humans when given the opportunity. The kids stumbling upon the remains of the first park seemed very similar to a scene in The Lost World where Vince Vaughn stumbles upon an old Ingen site. And of course the pterasaur attack seemed very reminiscent of Jurassic Park III, although I thought not quite as well done.

Jurassic Park III also has Alan Grant deriding the dinosaurs Ingen created as "theme park monsters", whereas in the original Jurassic Park everyone treated them as authentic as far as they knew. That line seems oddly prescient given the plot of Jurassic World.

I liked the new film though it's nowhere near as good as the original, and I can't say I found it a giant leap in quality over the previous two sequels, though as I've mentioned I liked them as well. It's hard to put my finger on, but whatever they did to tweak the appearance of the raptors, especially, from previous films wasn't exactly to my liking. But Chris Pratt is great in everything and it was exciting enough, for sure.

 

[BillJ]

I am disappointed that they haven't taken on board the newest theories about what dinosaurs were really like. Science has moved on since the 1990s, yet the film-makers figured they'd rather stay consistent with what the old movies did than accept that dinosaurs were more like giant chickens than lizard creatures.

I tend to think, that visually, giant lizards are more frightening than giant chickens. Film being a visual medium, they are going to take the angle that hooks the audience over correct science.

 

[Lance]

I am disappointed that they haven't taken on board the newest theories about what dinosaurs were really like. Science has moved on since the 1990s, yet the film-makers figured they'd rather stay consistent with what the old movies did than accept that dinosaurs were more like giant chickens than lizard creatures.

I tend to think, that visually, giant lizards are more frightening than giant chickens. Film being a visual medium, they are going to take the angle that hooks the audience over correct science.

I take your point. Doctor Who did a giant chicken monster back in 1983. It didn't exactly cover itself in glory.

http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/The_Ergon